Patrick M. Hunt
How Judge Hunt rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Hunt
Patrick M. Hunt has served as a U.S. magistrate judge in the Fort Lauderdale Division of the Southern District of Florida since 2013. He graduated from the University of Miami School of Law. His work includes recommendations on Social Security appeals, dismissal motions, and default judgments.
Judge Hunt's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Hunt, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Discovery
State specific discovery objections; generalized or boilerplate objections will not be sustained.
“All objections to discovery requests must be specific. The parties shall not make generalized, vague, or boilerplate objections. Nonspecific objections do not comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules and will not be sustained by this Court.”
Discovery
Keep a discovery motion to five pages.
“The motion shall not exceed five pages in length.”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026).
How Judge Hunt decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Jandasek v. Kijakazi, he recommended affirming the Commissioner after finding substantial evidence supported the administrative decision, denying the claimant’s summary-judgment motion.
“Magistrate Judge Hunt issued his Report, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion be denied ... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 18] is hereby DENIED;”
In Miami Mantra v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, he recommended denying emergency preliminary relief after finding the asserted harm speculative and considering mitigation already in place.
“Although Plaintiffs' concerns are undoubtedly sincere, they offered little more than speculation that the parade of horribles suggested would actually occur, or even that they are likely to do so. ... For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 10, be DENIED.”
Procedural preferences
In Inversiones YV3343 v. Lynx FBO Fort Lauderdale, he recommended default judgment on liability while reserving damages because a conclusory affidavit did not substantiate the claimed amount.
“he suggests that the Court grant in part and deny in part the Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment ... grant the default but reserve judgment on the amount of damages because the Plaintiff's only evidence in support of its $800,000 damages claim is an affidavit that 'does not detail how Plaintiff came to the conclusion'”
In Ion Insurance Company v. Rich Guys Nickel, Hunt recommended staying the third-party negligent-procurement action because the claimant's damages would accrue only if the related declaratory-judgment coverage claim succeeded.
“Here, Respondent's damages will only accrue if Plaintiff's request for declaratory judgment is granted. ... Casey Alexander Pickett's Motion to Abate, or in the Alternative, Stay the Third-Party Action, ECF No. 40, should be GRANTED.”
In Granoff v. Merelli, he recommended approval of an FLSA settlement after reviewing the disputed liability, damages, and attorney-fee allocation.
“Accordingly, this Court finds that the Settlement Agreement is a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide FLSA dispute. ... Plaintiff's Motion to Approve Settlement. ECF No. 37, should be GRANTED, the Parties' Settlement Agreement APPROVED, and the case DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
In Caron, Hunt examined billing entries and recommended a 30 percent cut to hours he found excessive, including routine tasks better handled by support staff. The district judge approved the fee award over objections.
“The undersigned finds an additional 30 percent across-the-board cut appropriate here.”
In Holden v. Systems & Services Technologies, Hunt recommended denying arbitration after the defendant failed to investigate or cure its noncompliance with the arbitration administrator’s policies.
“defaulted under Section 3 on its right to ask the Court to stay the trial and compel the proceeding to arbitration.”
Cautions
In Sierra v. Aventa Health, he recommended dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute after the plaintiff repeatedly failed to appear or retain counsel.
“recommending that this Court grant Defendants' Ore Tenus Motion and dismiss this case without prejudice given Plaintiff's continued non-compliance ... Defendants' Ore Tenus Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 31] is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Magistrate Judge Hunt issued his Report, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion be denied ... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 18] is hereby DENIED;”
“and that Defendant's Motion be granted ... Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 22] is hereby GRANTED; The ALJ's decision is AFFIRMED”
“recommending that this Court grant Defendants' Ore Tenus Motion and dismiss this case without prejudice given Plaintiff's continued non-compliance ... Defendants' Ore Tenus Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 31] is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings [DE 10] is GRANTED IN PART, as to the issue of dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction; The Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of personal jurisdiction.”
“he suggests that the Court grant in part and deny in part the Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment ... grant the default but reserve judgment on the amount of damages because the Plaintiff's only evidence in support of its $800,000 damages claim is an affidavit that 'does not detail how Plaintiff came to the conclusion'”
“he determined that the Motion should be granted in part ... The Motion for Bill of Costs [ECF No. 66] is GRANTED IN PART. The Defendant shall recover taxable costs of $5,262.25”
“Magistrate Judge Hunt recommends that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, [DE 29], be DENIED.”
“Casey Alexander Pickett's Motion to Abate, or in the Alternative, Stay the Third-Party Action, ECF No. 40, should be GRANTED.”
“Magistrate Judge Hunt recommended that we deny all three grounds Leija raised in the Motion. ... After careful review, we OVERRULE Leija's Objections and ADOPT Magistrate Judge Hunt's R&R in full.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 10, be DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Approve Settlement. ECF No. 37, should be GRANTED, the Parties' Settlement Agreement APPROVED, and the case DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendants' Motion is GRANTED in part. The Defendants are hereby awarded $130 for serving summons and subpoenas. The Motion is otherwise DENIED.”
“the Motion to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration, ECF No. 3, be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 1 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, not for Judge Hunt: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 848 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 7,287 | 3.5 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 16 | 10.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 45 | 17.1 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,755 | 3.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 20,408 | 0 months |
| Sep 2022 | 8,287 | 3.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 8,536 | 3.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,657 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 9,471 | 3.7 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Hunt with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hunt, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hunt's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace